“There’s no Ouija board required to figure out how Justice Scalia would vote on these things, he’s already voted,” Langhofer told KPNX during a panel discussion on Sunday. “We’re at the second-to-last step in how these cases unfold when Justice Scalia died.”

Nothing new here. Thomas has appeared dead, brain or otherwise, on the bench for 20 years.

4. Not the Onion? nt

5. Why do you suppose EVERY OTHER ATTY. I'VE HEARD said the exact opposite?

The LAWS state that a justice must be present at the hearings (arguments) AND the release of the decision for their vote to count. That's one reason there's no need to insist on a replacement immediately. The only cases the replacement would be able t vote on are those that haven't been heard by the court, and I think most of the controversial ones have already been heard.

23. I don't know the law, but here are two sources I was relying on.

(clip)
What happens to existing Supreme Court cases? Are they stopped until the Supreme Court is back to full strength?

The Supreme Court will continue to accept, hear, and rule on cases like normal, despite its shorthanded status. Importantly, any vote Scalia made on cases that haven’t come to a decision issued are now void, meaning some 5-4 cases could potentially be turned into 4-4 ties.

(clip)
The loss of Justice Antonin Scalia will have an immediate impact on the Supreme Court.

Votes that Scalia has cast but which have not yet been made public will be voided if the justice’s vote is a deciding one, according to legal experts.

“If there was a case where there was a 5-4 decision, and he was that fifth vote — but they hadn’t issued their opinions yet, that will have to be a do-over,” explained Carrie Severino, chief counsel for the conservative Judicial Crisis Network.

However, upcoming votes in which the court will now be split 4-4 will still be heard.

20. Brooks Brothers zombie riot.

22. Zombie Just Us

Scalia once lobbied Obama advisor to have Elena Kagan nominated to the Supreme Court

BY CNN WIRE, FEBRUARY 15, 2016

When the shocking news of Justice Antonin Scalia’s passing hit Saturday night, my mind raced back to a White House Correspondents Association dinner seven years ago, when we were seated together.

We bantered about my hometown of Chicago, where he had taught law before ascending to the bench. He opined on wine and music and generally lived up to his reputation as a man who told and enjoyed a good story.

And then our conversation took an unexpected turn.

Justice David Souter, Scalia’s longtime colleague on the court, had just announced his retirement, creating a vacancy for President Obama to fill. Scalia figured that as senior adviser to the new president, I might have some influence on the decision — or at least enough to pass along a message.

“I have no illusions that your man will nominate someone who shares my orientation,” said Scalia, then in his 23rd year as the court’s leading and most provocative conservative voice. “But I hope he sends us someone smart.”

A little taken aback that he was engaging me on the subject, I searched for the right answer, and lamely offered one that signaled my slight discomfort with the topic. “I’m sure he will, Justice Scalia.”

He wasn’t done. Leaning forward, as if to share a confidential thought, he tried again.

“Let me put a finer point on it,” the justice said, in a lower, purposeful tone of voice, his eyes fixed on mine. “I hope he sends us Elena Kagan.”

18. Zombie voting? Is this how the zombie apocalypse starts?

19. I actually agree with Kory Langhofer on this one.

If Scalia is able to appear in person to the voting booth with his ID card issued by the state only after providing his long form birth certificate, proof of citizenship, and 3 utility bills from his current address then he's welcome to cast a vote just like the rest of us.

There's no reason a dead guy can't vote just so long as he is treated equally and fairly the same as any other good red blooded proven beyond all doubt American (not Mexican) voter.

28. In recent years I havre read more than one decision from the court.

meaning I have read Scalia (and damn the man could write! Even if I did not agree with him most of the time. There was one he wrote for the majority that flored me, but as his clerks have pointed out, when the law won and was for the liberal side, he did split that way) So who exactly is going to write those decisions? Somehow I suspect Zombie Scalia will not be nearly as good with a pen... but I am willing to give it a whirl... I want to know how good a dead man can write.